Here's a really fascinating video of Bryan Colangelo during the first round of the last draft, trying desperately to get Williams late in the first round. It includes a call to Danny Ainge, asking him why he wanted Telfair instead. Interesting stuff.
(As I said right after the draft, I liked the Rondo pick better than the move for Telfair and think Boston should have chosen Roy, Foye, or Gay instead of trading for Telfair. I like all three of them a lot better than Telfair.)
As a Bulls fan, I found Charley Rosen's take on a recent Bulls game interesting. I thought it was pretty spot on in terms of strengths and weaknesses. Charley tends to be overly critical of players, but I thought his criticisms here were fair.
Any thoughts on the Celtics' season so far? From what I've read, Boston fans seem to be blaming the coach. I think the GM deserves more of the blame. But things will get better for you guys. I'd expect a finish closer to .500 than .250.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This is neat stuff; thanks for forwarding.
Colangelo has a very well-deserved reputation for helping build the Suns into a very successful franchise. That said, this video sure doesn't make him look like someone with much of a poker face. During one call about a two-thirds of the way through this clip he goes from 'I like one particular player' to 'any chance you go PG?' to 'where's Marcus Williams going?' in the space of about three seconds.
As for the Telfair/Roy thing, you won't get a ton of argument here. I starting pimping Roy on this blog at the start of the NCAAs last spring and think he could have fit in very well as a PG/combo guard in the high-post offense the Celtics ran last year. Word is that the Celtics (like lots of other teams) were worried about his knees and felt he was a very high injury risk.
Foye and Gay we disagree about for other reasons. As wing players go, I suspect they won't be particularly better than lots of guys who are available in the middle of the first round every year. Telfair may never become a good starting PG. If he does, however, he'll be far more valuable than a good starting SG or SF. Of course, if this happens we'd never be able to trade for him with the 7th pick in a bad draft. The guy's only 21 and plays a position where most pros aren't any good until they're 24 or 25. There's reason to be patient here.
In any event, the bigger problem with the Telfair deal is that Ainge has not constructed a roster that is well-suited for the kind of up-tempo game Telfair is good at. On other teams (Phoenix, Charlotte, Toronto) that have the roster and the interest in pushing the pace, Telfair would be in a position to shine. The Celtics however are full of plodding, half-court players (e.g. Szczerbiak, Pierce, Jefferson) that are best suited to work the shot clock for a high-percentage shots.
Indeed, last year's team was one of the most efficient in the league. The reason they lost their games had more to do with their sieve-like defense and their horrible offensive or defensive play in the post.
Of course, you would expect Ainge to recognize that he had a roster full of half-court players in aprt because just six months earlier he'd traded for Wally and in the process ditched three players (Davis, Reed, Banks) who are at their best in the kind of fast-break basketball Telfair is designed for. So if Danny was turning over his roster to build a half-court team, why did he spend draft night acquiring two PGs who struggle in the half court because of their poor outside shooting? Beats me.
As you say, our GM has created a seriously flawed roster. The silver lining is unlike New York, Minnesota, and lots of other bad teams the Celtics are a mess that will be easy to clean up. Most of the roster is on rookie deals. They have no big albatross contracts than run more than two years after this one. Either Ainge or his replacement will be given a relatively attractive reclamation project. Given Ainge's track record, however, I cringe at what he might do with it.
After watching the first four games I think you're overly optimistic on the Cs. This is a bad team that barely beat Charlotte at home after having three days to prepare. 30 wins is far more likely than 40, and if things go south (e.g. injuries, Doc gets fired, Pierce decides he can't take it any more, etc), 25 wins isn't out of the question.
Believe me, watching the Cs these days I spend an unhealthy amount of time thinking about what the team would look like with Oden or Durant in our frontcourt.
In addition, I didn't want to drop the Chicago thing.
I can only watch the Bulls when they're nationally televised. That said, their opening night win over Miami was obviously impressive. I think Charlie-- his curmudgeonly nature aside-- is right about the team's strengths and flaws. The primary thing that struck me on offense was their complete lack of any post game. None of Wallace, Thomas or Brown can create a high-percentage shot to save their lives. Consequently, players like Hinrich and Deng have to spend a lot of time sprinting around high screens to get open. Teams that are more motivated and talented at perimeter defense than the Heat or the Bucks will be able to slow Chicago's offense down.
At the same time, watching the Bulls gives me a ton of respect for Skiles as a coach. This is tight, hard-working team that knows what they're trying to do on offense and defense and executes well. They go out an attack the weaknesses of their opponents (e.g. Gary Payton) without significantly going away from their own strengths and game plan. It's all the more impressive when you consider that two-thirds of their regular rotation is under age 25. NBA players that young normally are erratic, confused and mistake-prone; on this Bulls team you don't see a lot of that. The Bulls young talent is a lot better than the Celtics young talent, which certainly helps. The team is also a lot better coached. No question I'd rather be watching this Chicago team every night than the local squad.
Regarding the Colangelo video, I just thought it was neat to see how it really works behind the scenes. I give him credit for going after Marcus Williams, who I think will develop into a good PG for a long time. I'm not a big fan of the T.J. Ford move, or the extension they gave him, but to Colangelo's credit he knows the direction he wants to take that team and is getting players to fit that style of play. As you mentioned, other GMs (like Ainge) aren't as focused in that regard.
Personally I like Foye and Gay more than Telfair because I think both of them have shots to be better than just starters. Gay, in particular, could be really special. Plus I'm not sold on Telfair at all. But I've always been more pessimistic on him than you. I would have liked Telfair for a mid-to-low first rounder, but not when Roy/Gay/Foye were on the clock.
I agree that, fortunately, Ainge hasn't screwed up long-term as badly as other bad teams. Getting Ratliff for LaFrentz cut a year off of that albatross, and Wally's deal is only a couple more years now (and he might be tradeable to the right team). The rest of the squad is on rookie or cheap deals. You'll get something good for Pierce.
I may be overly optimistic about the Celtics, but I don't want to read too much into the first four games. I don't think they're very good (they weren't last year either), but they have enough pieces to expect at least 30-35 wins or so. They won't be at the very bottom at least.
One positive I think may come out of this season for the Celtics is that the team might snap out of the idea of trying to contend in the next 2-3 years. That wasn't going to happen, and the focus on trying to improve to win now is counterproductive given the current roster. One reason I think that the Celtics' young guys have been overrated by some is that a lot of the minutes and shots have been going to vets, and we haven't gotten enough of a chance to see how they'll do. It's time to see how Jefferson and Green do with bigger minutes and more opportunities. That will tell you whether they're really building blocks (I'm not convinced, but we'll see) and give you a better shot at Greg Oden. Hopefully they start focusing more on the young guys at some point this season.
Regarding the Bulls, I think they look good and (as Colangelo said) are very deep and athletic. Realistically the current squad can never contend without some low post scoring (and a more reliable scoring option). A trade for Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal would make this squad a contender. Or getting Oden (via a Knicks pick). But until then the hope has to be that the young guys develop and there's some deal for a scorer (preferably a post scorer). We'll see what happens.
I agree that Skiles is a great coach though. He's done a lot with what he has. Fortunately for him, he has more to work with this year. (Doc Rivers isn't as bad as Simmons and others believe, though. He's no Skiles but he's not a bad coach and has been saddled with a pretty limited group.)
One positive I think may come out of this season for the Celtics is that the team might snap out of the idea of trying to contend in the next 2-3 years. That wasn't going to happen, and the focus on trying to improve to win now is counterproductive given the current roster.
We in agreement about most all of your post, and very much so here. The most damning thing about Ainge's tenure is that we're now in year four and the team is both significantly worse than the team he took over, and arguably still 3-4 years away from getting out of the first round of the playoffs. If Ainge had held a press conference when he took over and said he was on an eight-year plan to respectability Boston would have revolted. Instead he sat courtside during a second-round Celtics playoff game and said on national TV that he was taking the job to "turn this thing around". Needless to say, the team hasn't been back to the second round of the playoffs since.
Post a Comment